Mrs Caz wrote:
danny, it is the reverse of those that said because we wanted the PP, we were advocating deliberately losing to get it.
People only ever hear what they want to hear. No wonder there are so many wars in the world.
Spot on Mrs C.
A lot of people who were indifferent to the plight of the "win at all costs" type were instantly grouped into the pro-tank crowd.
Everyone had a varying opinion on the matter, however since each faction had ringleaders and hardliners, everyone sort of got heaped into one camp or the other.
"You want to win at all costs regardless of the damage missing the pick will do to us? You're an anti-tanker."
"You won't fall into a screaming heap and curse to the heavens every time we lose and get closer to the PP? You must be in the pro-tank camp."
Pro-tank, anti-tank, win at all costs, don't care if we lose, want the PP, don't want the PP... regardless of what your stance was, I just think it's good that it's now 100% clear to all that we need that PP like a fat kid needs cake.
Also, I'm certain I read a few passionate "screw the PP, we don't need it" type posts from people who were bleeding navy blue at the time.